I agree that Oracle isn't trying to create a ruling that obviates fair use; but assume you believe that the appellate court's ruling is correct, and APIs are copyrightable, how does fair use cover implementing an API for compatibility?
> Oracle's argument about Android and its use of Java is that Android did not run Java apps; it ran Java code, but it did not implement enough of the Java API surface to let you run Java apps unmodified.
So what? Partial compatibility is still meaningful in software engineering, and should allow libraries to run on both. Are you saying that if Google had fully implemented all of the Java APIs, it would have been fair use?
Further, can you ground the above reasoning (that fair use covers API copying, and that Google's partial implementation is material here) in the actual rulings for the case? I don't remember any of this from when I read them, though I do admit that was some time ago.
> WINE, for example, is not ruled impermissible by the sort of ruling Oracle seeks.
Why not? Simply because you cannot write a .exe that would run in WINE, but not in Windows?
Further, what if the example was instead Linux? Linux implements Unix's APIs, but also adds other APIs. You can use existing "Unix" code in new, Linux-only apps that won't run on other *nix OSs.
> Oracle's argument about Android and its use of Java is that Android did not run Java apps; it ran Java code, but it did not implement enough of the Java API surface to let you run Java apps unmodified.
So what? Partial compatibility is still meaningful in software engineering, and should allow libraries to run on both. Are you saying that if Google had fully implemented all of the Java APIs, it would have been fair use?
Further, can you ground the above reasoning (that fair use covers API copying, and that Google's partial implementation is material here) in the actual rulings for the case? I don't remember any of this from when I read them, though I do admit that was some time ago.
> WINE, for example, is not ruled impermissible by the sort of ruling Oracle seeks.
Why not? Simply because you cannot write a .exe that would run in WINE, but not in Windows?
Further, what if the example was instead Linux? Linux implements Unix's APIs, but also adds other APIs. You can use existing "Unix" code in new, Linux-only apps that won't run on other *nix OSs.